Questions in search of answers

Just a few observations on announcements from the province’s health ministry lately.

1.  labradore points out that others – like the local news media -  are noticing the odd but telling similarity between the Lewisporte cuts announcement and the one from Eastern Health about breast cancer back in April.

So much for the story then and now that it was all up to the local health authority.

2.  During Cameron, every senior government witness insisted that all the decisions were made by the people at the health authority because that’s what they do; ministers of health and cabinet did not get involved in operational issues.

Like say, deciding whether to shut down laboratory and x-ray services.

Who decided on an operational issue in the Lewisporte case?

Hint:  it wasn’t the regional health authorities.  They found out about the cut the morning it was announced.

3.  And how many times will a cabinet minister refer to the recommendations of the Cameron Inquiry in trying to justify the operational decision made in Lewisporte?

4.  Then there’s the claim by no less a personage than the Premier that the cuts came from the health authorities and that it was aimed at improving the system.

He claims the health authority made a recommendation “to us” for services that should be cut.

He leaves out the important bit, of course, that the health authority didn’t come up with this idea on their own.   They suggested cuts  only when prompted by a request from the health department to suggest cuts in the first place.

And the cuts had nothing to do with either offsetting the cost of the health centre in Lewisporte (as the Friday release claims) or “improving” the system.

That’s plain from the letters released by government late on Friday.

But don’t take my word for it:  Read them for yourself.

5.  And since we are in the questioning mood:  why would a provincial government that is evidently flush with billions in loose change ask for recommendations on what to cut from health budgets in the first place, especially when the sum finally settled on by  - whom?  cabinet, the Premier, definitely Paul Oram – was such a measly, miserable amount?

And that’s based on nothing more than the general political principle that you just don’t go out and randomly shoot off a body part when you don’t need to. 

Cuts make people upset.

Cuts to health care make lots of people really upset.

Burn ‘em at the stake kinda upset.

And they don’t get un-upset easily.

Un-upsetting them will be costly either in blood and/or treasure:  cash or in political strips taken off someone’s hide.

Therefore, as the political wisdom would suggest:  do NOT cut health care unless it is absolutely necessary.

So why in the name of all that is political and therefore unholy would any cabinet in its right mind ask health regions to recommend a list of slashes, some of them valued at upwards of a million bucks.

6.   When did they make the decisions?  Observers of government will note the date on the letters released on Friday is from early 2009, well into the budget cycle and long after decisions would normally be made.  People will start asking hard questions about when all this was decided. Evidently it wasn’t in August.

7.  There is no plan. And when all that is done, ask yourself why a government department would release letters that show their initial talking points were more composed at the Mad hatter’s tea party?

Usually you release evidence that backs your claim, not further hints that – contrary to the Premier’s claims at the bored of trayed last week - people in the departments of government have no idea what they are doing.

-srbp-

Duff points out obvious: Keith Coombs has no cred on city finances

Okay, right off the bat there has to be the fairly obvious point:  the guy who oversaw the Mile One stadium money pit and has been known to talk about surpluses that turned into horrendous deficits is not a guy with a huge amount of credibility when it comes to numbers anyway. 

If Keith Coombs said one plus one is two, most people in St. John’s would run it through the calculator just to check.

Anyway, Shannie Duff is quite rightly pointing out that challenger Keith Coombs claim that there is a $44 million surplus in the municipal budget is “unsubstantiated”.

But here’s the thing Shannie:  Coomb’s claim is not irresponsible.  It is total typical Keith Coombs fiscal bullshit.

Call it what it is:  bullshit.  When people hear “Keith Coombs” they already think “crap” right away.  It’s Pavlovian. So don’t be coy and polite.  Call a spade a spade:  Keith Coombs is full of fiscal crap. People will cheer your unbridled honesty.

Anyway, here’s Duff’s version:

Duff says Coombs’ $44 Million Tax Claim Irresponsible

Deputy Mayor candidate Shannie Duff says her opponent's claim that the City of St. John's expects a total surplus of $44 million over the next four years is "unsubstantiated."  "Does it really exist?" asks Duff.

On Friday Ms. Duff met with the City's comptroller to discuss Keith Coomb's claim that the city expects annual tax surpluses of $11 million per year for the next four years.

Mr. Coombs has based a promise to vote against any increase in taxation, according to his website, "without impacting on the level of services offered."

"The forecast of a tax surplus appears to be based on an internal planning document which made several significant assumptions which Mr. Coombs has conveniently chosen to ignore" says Duff. "The internal document assumes the City's current level of expenditures remains constant, but we know there are negotiated payroll increases coming, we know all of the bids for our tenders are coming back in excess of the money we have budgeted, and we have to account for inflation" notes Duff.

The significant cost of curb side recycling program scheduled to be introduced next year is not part of the expenditure forecast in the internal document.  "What is Mr. Coombs going to do about that?  Cut it?" asks Duff.

Shannie Duff says Mr. Coombs' promise is "old politics at its worst.  For a candidate who keeps talking about going forward, Keith Coombs is campaigning like a relic from the past."

- 30 -

Shannie's Statement from the Rogers Candidates Forum

I think most voters would agree that what a politician does is more important that what a politician says.

I am proud of my record at City Hall. Whether the issue has been protection of our environment, affordable housing, social justice, or support for neighbourhood groups I have been there.

I have also been a voice for a balanced approach to planning and development. We have to find a balance between growth and protecting the social, cultural, and heritage assets that make St. John's a creative and livable city.

What do I mean by balance?

I support good development that is appropriate for its location
I support change when it is in the public interest.
I support fairness in dealing with development applications.
I supported 1.6 billion dollars of development in St. John's since 2001.

There is a difference between my opponent and I. I don't want just any development. I want good development.

My opponent is also promising to give back to taxpayers $44 million over the next four years. Does this surplus really exist?

My opponent's claim is based on a preliminary internal document developed to assist staff with budget preparations.

The document's assumptions do not include any provision for a reduction of high property tax assessments if people appeal (as they will).

It does not include the start up costs for Robin Hood Bay or the new sewerage treatment plant.

There is no provision for inflation for providing our existing services, and we know all of our tenders have come back at prices over our estimates.

I think Council will cut the mill rate, but who ho has a crystal ball to predict a surplus four years out? City staff told Council that this forecast was very preliminary, based on some major assumptions, and not for public release. Perhaps if my opponent had attended any meetings of the Finance committee or the Internal Audit committee he would have known this.

My opponent isn't the first politician to promise to cut taxes during an election. It is easy to say.

I say, judge me on my record. Judge me on what I have done.

If you share my passion for this wonderful city of ours, then I ask you for your support, again, and I thank you.

-srbp-

The Cruel Shoes

The picture says it all.

Suddenly, Jack Layton is suddenly not so keen on an election.  He’s talking about making parliament work, about working with the Connies.  You know, the sort of stuff Jack and his householders used to chide the Grits over.

An unusually media-skittish Mr. Layton said little Saturday during an event in Toronto, but what he did say lowered the temperature somewhat.

“I think that everybody involved would want to see us co-operate in the House of Commons and get some results for people — especially those that are struggling right now: the unemployed and people being left behind,” Mr. Layton said as he inched away from reporters at an archway opening in Toronto.

“So that's going to remain our preoccupation.”

Looks like the real preoccupation will be getting the shoe that’s on the other foot out of Jack’s ass.  Hint:  it went in via the mouth while he was shooting it off before.

-srbp-

Megamania: NL falls farther behind in wind energy development

While it has huge potential in wind energy, Newfoundland and Labrador currently has less than 60 megawatts in production or in development.

There are no plans for more and the province’s 2007 energy plan places tight restrictions on development of any additional wind energy.  The plan talks about potential but ensures that there is little chance the potential will be developed.

For electricity, the energy plan is focused on development of the Lower Churchill to the exclusion of all else.

As a rest of the political obsession with turf wars and 40 year old megaprojects, the province  - already well back in the pack - is falling farther and farther behind in a race where it should be leading.

1.  Hydro Quebec is pushing ahead with development of new energy technologies.  It’s looking for 500 new megawatts of wind energy.  That’s on top of existing projects and the ones in train.

Hydro-Québec has invited municipalities and native groups to compete for 500 megawatts of wind power contracts. Wind farms in the utility's third call for tenders must not exceed 25 megawatts.

The company’s strategic plan forecasts upwards of 4,000 megawatts of wind generation over the next four years.

2.  Wolfe Island wind farm official opened.  Canadian Hydro officially opened the Wolfe Island wind project this past week.  The project is the second largest wind farm in Canada and generates slightly less than 200 megawatts.

3.  Norway just installed the first floating turbine to harness offshore wind energy.

4.  Work on a $1.5 billion offshore wind farm in Rhode Island is continuing apace.

-srbp-

From the rumour mill: municipal politics version

Stuff you hear around.

Could be real.

Could be something else.

You decide.

1. Win or lose – and more likely the latter than the former - Rompin’ Rip-Off Ronnie Ellsworth will ditch municipal politics to run in St. John’s North in the next provincial election. 

The guy has made no secret of his aggressive ambitions that go all the way to being the second Cable Guy to occupy the Eighth Floor.   Ever notice Ron’s love of words like “piece” and how he has tried to copy other aspects of his idol’s political approach?

Ronnie’s rapid rise – never more than 18 months in a political job  - fits perfectly with the timetable to replace  the geriatric Tory incumbent and then 18 months after that look to replace his political heartthrob.

2.  Win or lose  - again more likely the latter than the former - Keith Coombs will look to run in St. John’s West in the next provincial election when the geriatric Tory incumbent in that seat finally retires. 

-srbp-

From the rumour mill: electricity stuff you hear around town

A compendium of the stuff ordinary people have been saying. 

Could be true.

Could be complete bullshit.

1.   NALCO will have to do a major re-write on its Lower Churchill project to correct deficiencies.  That’s what you get for relying on a decade old pile of paper.

2.   Danny Williams’ attack on Hydro Quebec was a sign that his dream legacy project is screwed up royally, with little hope of ever being built no matter how long he stays in office. 

3.   The little hissy fit was a sign of his usual impulsive decision-making style. Williams was so pissed by Russell Wangersky’s column in the weekend Telegram that Williams had to stick a denial into his speech at the board of trade.

4.   Williams will use his hissy fit as the excuse when the re-write comes.  He’ll claim there is some sort of plot or conspiracy aimed at keeping the Lower Churchill project from being built, while the real reason the project is screwed up is because of the way it’s being run.  Williams is recycling excuses from decades ago but some people are ready to believe anything even after the government inked a deal in April that shows that Hydro Quebec can’t block the Pet Project.

-srbp-

Hydro Quebec not an issue: Ed Martin

A few days before Danny Williams tried to blame Hydro-Quebec for delays and problems in the Lower Churchill project, NALCO chief executive Ed Martin was singing the same old song about what a great project he had and how any day now he’d be ready to start talking to prospective customers about a sale.

He’s been saying that for three years.

But here’s part of what you’ll find in the August 31 Toronto Star:

Martin doesn't see the Quebec issue as a major stumbling block, as regulation requires the province to allow access to its grid in return for a set tariff. Hydro Quebec and Nalcor are just working out the details.

That’s the exact opposite of the line Danny has been pushing for a week or so, now.

You can also notice in this piece that  - according to Martin - the project will be financed at least in part by oil revenues.  Some of those are flowing now from White Rose, but others won’t be along for the better part of the next decade.

Ed Martin is going to have to pull off some neat financial tricks if he plans to pay for a $10 to $14 billion project  Danny Williams said will be pushing power in 2015 when the cash Martin is counting on won’t start showing up at his front door until around 2020. 

But anyway…

Ed needs to talk to Danny or vice versa.  Basically these guys are on two completely different pages about this project. 

Then again, Danny and others seem to be on different pages quite a bit lately, including with himself over Hydro-Quebec and an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill.

Rest assured though, that as much as Danny Williams and his team appear to be all over the map, there is a piece of paper somewhere with the word plan written on the top of it.

At least that’s what he felt compelled to tell the local board of trade the other day after a local newspaper editor pointed out the decidedly errat…mercuri…caprici…ummm…errr… impulsive way the provincial government tends to be. 

Well, he said “slaphappy” too, but let’s use impulsive because it is a bit friendlier than most of the words that come to mind.

-srbp-

Signing his own death warrant

Newfoundland and Labrador information commissioner Ed Ring is welcoming a  court case that will settle once and for all a dispute with the provincial government over access to government records.

The provincial government is insisting Ring shouldn’t have access to documents as part of his review under the province’s open records law.  That law currently gives Ring the powers of a commissioner under the public inquiries act to compel the delivery of any and all documents he deems relevant to discharging his responsibilities.

Danny Williams disagrees.

Now a judge will get to sort it out.

Of course, those of us who know Ed Ring personally wouldn’t expect anything from him but exactly this thoughtful and responsible discharge of his duties as set out by law.

Let’s just hope that if the judge sides with Ring, the powers that be don’t decide Ring must be replaced with someone considerably more pliable.   it would be a shame that doing his job and speaking his mind wound up being a case of the guy signing the death warrant for his own job.

-srbp-

Just say “No!”

Federal finance leprechaun Jim Flaherty thinks the federal government will take a while to get out of deficit spending and doing that will take a bit of pain.

"I am telling Canadians today that if a politician tries to tell you that getting back to surplus will be pain-free, they are simply not telling you the truth," Flaherty said.

"It will require a lot of saying 'no' to pet projects and special interests."

Flaherty forecast the federal government will be running deficits until 2015.  In the meantime, the priority will be on economic stimulus spending and restraining growth in programs.

Guess that means projects requiring tens of billions of federal tax dollars, that currently have no customers  - and no sign of customers - for their output, and that are running way behind schedule are going to be SOL.

-srbp-

Oram and Williams give wildly contradictory accounts of Lewisporte decision

As a sharp-eared reader picked up, the raw video of the Premier’s scrum revealed that Lewisporte MHA Wade Verge knew about cuts to health service in his district some time before July 9, 2009.

That’s the day Premier Danny Williams shuffled Ross Wiseman out of health and moved Paul Oram in.

The decision wasn’t announced until August 31, almost two months later.  And even then, some people claim,  the wording of the news release didn’t make plain what was happening in the affected communities.

The regional health authorities involved didn’t hear about the changes until the morning they were announced.

But even that is now at odds with comments by health minister Paul Oram.  Under questioning in the House of Assembly on Wednesday, Oram said the decision was made after a trip he made to the region to discuss the issue with local officials:

The fact is that this decision was made during discussions, Mr. Speaker, with Central Health and Community Services, also with discussions that we had ongoing with the community. The fact of the matter is, we went out to Lewisporte, and we told them very clearly that this facility would not be built or put inside of the new facility. We would not have X-ray and lab inside of the new facility. That is exactly what we told them, Mr. Speaker. They understood where we were coming from and we moved forward on that basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Isn’t it true that you told the people in Lewisporte at that time that there would not be a one-roof concept for lab and X-ray services, but you did not tell them you were prepared to gut their service within two weeks, did you?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ORAM: Mr. Speaker, I said exactly what I said, and that was that there would be no laboratory and X-ray services under the one roof in the new facility that we were building in Lewisporte. In terms of –

MS JONES: (Inaudible).

MR. ORAM: - if she would let me answer. In terms of a discussion around what was happening with closing out the lab and X-ray part of what we were doing in Lewisporte, that discussion was had but there was no final decision made on that when I was out in Lewisporte.

Either the Premier has his story shagged up or Oram does.

Which is it?

 

-srbp-

Expropriation by the numbers

At long last the rest of us get to see some of the simple print ads that have been causing such political consternation in central Newfoundland among the supporters of the current administration.

There are a series of them, some of which connect the amount of money to specific things like number of magnetic resonance imaging machines you could buy with the cash.

-srbp-

Freedom from Information: thousands of bucks for the Premier’s public speeches, redacted

It’s a bit of a hairy-assed editing job but the youtube video posted by VOCM includes a curious reference by the Premier to some of the access to information requests that he finds problematic.

You’ll find it at around the 1:45 mark. 

Danny Williams bitches about a request for copies of every speech he’s given as a politician.

That’s right. 

The guy who used to think that openness and freedom of information are good things has a problem with someone wanting copies of speeches he gave in public and for which texts exist.

This is the kind of thing that politicians would normally make readily available as a matter of course via the Internet.

Take a second a look around the Internet.  Try googling “speaking notes”  Politicians actually like people to find their speeches, even when the speeches are appallingly bad. 

Why back in the time before the Internet, when your humble e-scribbler used to edit transcripts of speeches by another Premier, the Premier’s Office would photocopy and send out speeches  - wait for it - free of charge, on request.  If the Internet had existed, we’d have published the damn things on the Internet as soon as we could largely because the Internet is a free means to disseminate information. 

in those days, speeches were records of government policy.  They were important because people could actually hold government accountable as a result of things said in speeches. And that Premier understood that as uncomfortable as it might be, the public had a right to hold their elected officials to account.   Certainly, no one in his office spent time micromanaging the living hell out of the entire government access to information system.

But that was then.

This is now.

And  the people looking for stuff like speeches are not people out to get this Premier or any other politician.  Ordinary folks like to see what commitments were made.  Academics like to see what was said and trace the history of an idea.  It’s all legitimate, normal and nothing for someone  - especially a politician - to get into a paranoiac lather over. 

But just take a breath and think about where Danny Williams’ head is on freedom of information.

Not only does Danny Williams force people to file an access to information request for copies of speeches he has given – they aren’t available otherwise -  he then bitches about the fact that people are interested in what he has to say.

Now in the case of that particular request, your humble e-scribbler happens to know about it.  An e-mail turned up in ye olde Bond Papers inbox giving the background and the horrendous amount of money Danny Williams’ office was demanding for delivering the speeches in hard copy only, even though they are available electronically.

If memory serves, we are talking thousands of dollars.  The speeches had to be produced in hard copy – supposedly – because the Premier’s Office claimed the speeches that were delivered in various public fora would have to be reviewed and possibly redacted.

Redacted?

Bits cut out of a public speech?

And no, they weren’t kidding.

The whole thing has gone off to the information commissioner where it sits, alongside a few other examples of the Premier’s Office efforts to frustrate public disclosure of information that should be in the public domain.

And people wonder why Alice in Wonderland is an apt source of metaphors for politics in Newfoundland and Labrador.

-srbp-

Cross Rhode Island off the power purchase list

Remember the missing memorandum of understanding with Rhode Island that was supposed to study shipping a couple of hundred megawatts of power from the Lower Churchill if nit gets built?

Yeah, it’s been missing in action for two years.

Well, it turns out that the whole process discovered that Rhode Island can’t handle the power. That little gem came up during Question Period in the emergency legislature session:

They found out that they did not have the capacity to negotiate a long-term power purchase agreement with Nalcor on behalf of the Province. Nor were they able, in their Legislature, to do the regulatory changes that were required in order to wheel electricity into the state. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we learned a lot through that discussion but it was not possible and we have moved on because other customers are in a position to be able to do business with Newfoundland and Labrador.

The only problem with that answer is that  - like many things natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale says - it doesn’t make sense.

First of all, the MOU was supposed to "develop and action plan to address any technical or regulatory requirements.  Throwing up hands and calling things off wasn’t supposed to be an option.

Second of all, while Rhode Island has a limited capacity to get power into the state, that was known at the time the MOU was signed.

Third of all, there’s a plan to deal with that.

Fourth of all, Rhode Island, as a state of the union like all the rest, has the legislative competence in the state legislature to make rules about energy.  They’ve been doing it for years.

This sounds a lot like Dunderdale’s efforts to discuss energy wheeling through New Brunswick on Tuesday when she kept talking about applications in front of something she called the “Ray-zhay”.  The “ray-zhee” is the Quebec energy regulator.

But wait.

It gets better.

When asked what other customers the province’s energy geniuses were talking to, Dunderdale listed off provinces and states that are on everyone’s list of potential customers.  The implication of Dunderdale’s answer was that none of them were likely customers.

And that gentle readers is the problem with this project:  there are no customers on tap. 

-srbp-

Techie update:  An e-mail from someone who knows these things advises that interstate transmission is regulated by a federal agency – FERC – which would be the same one that enables Canadian provinces to wheel power to places like New York.

Any Canadian province should be able to wheel power across several states provided it pays the appropriate costs and can, therefore, get it to the customer at a reasonable cost.

A curious misuse of words

Over the past couple of years, Premier Danny Williams and his cabinet got into the habit of referring to 2041 as the year that the Churchill Falls hydro project and all its power would be “repatriated” to Newfoundland and Labrador.

Leave aside the Mad Hatterish implication of talking about a river as if it had somehow been removed physically from the province.  Just look at the words used by the Premier Hisself:

2007 – Danny Williams’ speech to the Board of Trade: 

And in 2041, we will repatriate the Upper Churchill and take back what is rightfully ours. [Underlining in original]

2008 – Danny Williams, on the occasion of a land claims deal with the Innu:

"We all look forward, with great anticipation, to that day in 2041 when the Upper Churchill is finally repatriated to our province, once and for all," Williams said.

2009 – Danny Williams, during his little tirade aimed at Randy Simms:

And as well by then we will have wind on, we’ll have gas on, we’ll have the Churchill on, we will have repatriated the Upper Churchill, a lot of wonderful things happening in Newfoundland and Labrador and…

Hmmm.

Some of you may be wondering what is so special about 2041.  Well, that’s the year the contract with Hydro Quebec expires, the contract that sees power go to Hydro Quebec at ridiculously low prices.  In 2041,  Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation will find itself with 5400 megawatts of power and the ability to sell the power to whatever customer comes knocking.

And what of Hydro Quebec?

Well, it will still own one third of CF(L)Co unless it sheds its shares in the meantime. 

So with the Quebec Crown corporation still owning one third of Churchill Falls, the falls wouldn’t exactly be “repatriated” then, would they?  Hydro Quebec would still get a huge piece of the action from the falls.  That hardly seems like any sort of redress for the grievance found in the original contract.
But here’s the question:

When – if ever – might the falls be considered to revert entirely, and unquestionably, to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador?

-srbp-

NL caught screwing with Churchill Falls: the quotes

Yet more on the story of the year that everyone has thus far ignored.

1.  What part of “F**k off!” wasn’t clear?

From Dave Bartlett’s story on page three of the Wednesday Telegram (not online):

“They [Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation lawyers and directors] felt that we had extinguished their rights to the whole watershed area that they require to produce electricity in the Upper Churchill and that would cause them some concern,” said [natural resources minister Kathy] Dunderdale.

Dunderdale is quoted elsewhere in the story as saying that there was possibly some “ambiguity” in the 2008 legislation.  “Ambiguity” means doubtfulness or uncertainty over the meaning of words or phrases. 

Extinguishing a company’s rights to their business doesn’t sound like something that is a bit “iffy”.

2.  I don’t think that’s the conspiracy they meant…

Kathy Dunderdale, from debate on emergency legislation to change the “ambiguous” wording of the water rights reversion bill to something a bit more concrete:

Mr. Speaker, my head is kind of spinning with some of the things that we have heard here today. There are conspiracy theories all over the place. So much of this, of what we heard this afternoon, is so far out in left field that I am not even going to bother to comment on it, Mr. Speaker.

…

Certainly I am not assigning, nor is this government assigning, any motive to the board of CF(L)Co. We believe that they are negotiating this agreement in good faith. CF(L)Co has an issue, the lawyers have an issue, with the definition as it exists in the current legislation, and because of that ambiguity that is in that legislation we are back here today doing the amendment.

Of course not, Kathy.  The people who found out you were trying to f*ck them over would logically not be the ones with ulterior motives.

But since you insist you weren’t trying to screw them (now that you got caught)  let’s leave it at that.

3.  Dunderdale, on one alternative to the emergency session:

If this definition issue caused CF(L)Co to delay entering into the agreement Nalcor Energy still had the option of placing the proposed agreement in front of the Public Utilities Board and asking for an agreement to be imposed upon the parties. This would be a legitimate process, Mr. Speaker, as provided for under the legislation, but it would take up valuable time - time that is better applied to other tasks before us in advancing the project.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, if the agreement was put before the PUB for consideration, the PUB will be considering a proposed agreement that was subject to the same ambiguous definition of the Lower Churchill River raised by CF(L)Co.

Translation:  we were really worried about costly, embarrassing and ultimately unsuccessful legal action when CF(L)Co sued our asses off.  calling the House together in a hurry is way cheaper.

4.  No deal is imminent.  There are a few people running around St. John’s who think this emergency session means there’s a Lower Churchill deal around the corner.

Guess again.

There are only two serious issues holding up the project:  markets and money.  Four years after the “go it alone” option, note what Dunderdale listed in the House as two of the outstanding issues to be settled:

Some of these outstanding issues include ratification of the New Dawn Agreement with Innu Nation; an environmental assessment, which is expected to be complete next year; finding customers for the power, and obtaining financing for the project… [ Emphasis added]

-srbp-

Churchill Falls reversion fails for second time

The Newfoundland and Labrador government  is making quick changes to a 2008 law after lawyers for the Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation  - CF(L)Co – raised questions about the impact of the bill on the company’s 1961 lease and rights to all property related to Churchill Falls.

Lawyers for CF(L)Co raised the issue with the provincial government’s  NALCOR Energy company during talks on water management for the proposed Lower Churchill project. 

The changes were tabled Tuesday in an emergency sitting of the House of Assembly.

It appears that - reminiscent of the 1980 water rights reversion bill - the 2008 bill stripped CF(L)Co of its lease.

In the original 2008 bill - Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act - the Lower Churchill River is described as including “all waters that originate within the Churchill River catchment area and all rivers that naturally flow within the catchment area or from diversions into the catchment area.”

Clause three of the then stated that

any property in and rights to the use and flow of water, previously conferred by a grant, lease, licence or other instrument or under a statute of the province, or vested in, acquired by or accruing to a person by whatever means relating to the Lower Churchill River are extinguished.  [Emphasis added]

By combining the two clauses, the new bill effectively cancelled the 1961 Churchill Falls lease.  The 2008 law also blocked rights holders from any legal action and stripped them of  any entitlement to compensation.  

The bill became law on June 4, 2008.  There is no indication when cabinet issued the license to the energy corporation, now known as NALCOR Energy.

The changes introduced in Tuesday’s emergency session make it plain that the 2008 water rights law applies only to the Lower Churchill and that, for absolute certainty,  the 2008 bill “ excludes the area described in Appendix A to The Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation Limited (Lease) Act, 1961, and all waters while they are in that area.”

Emergency sessions are rare

For its part, the Williams administration is downplaying the session and the hasty changes.  In a news release, Dunderdale said that the act was never intended to cover Churchill Falls.

But the very fact the session was called to deal with one set of amendments to one bill suggests the issues involved are far from routine and that the legal implications of the water rights bill would be significant if left unamended.

Emergency or special sessions occur very rarely and usually only deal with extraordinary issues like war or labour disputes that threaten public health and safety.

Ordinarily – and if the implications of the bill were considered inconsequential or inadvertent -   CF(L)Co and NALCOR could simply have made routine amendments in the regular fall sitting a condition of an overall deal on water rights management on the Churchill River. 

Interestingly, the provincial government also tried to downplay the water rights bill in 2008, even to the point of making apparently misleading statements in the legislature.

In June 2008,  natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale told the House of Assembly that the bill was needed since government had decided against using the  Lower Churchill Development Corporation as the vehicle to develop the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls power projects. 

But the 2008 water rights bill didn’t repeal the 1978 Lower Churchill Development Act, nor did it remove the LCDC option for development of the Lower Churchill.  The 2008 bill merely extinguished previously existing rights, leases, grants and licenses. 

Deja vue

This marks the second time since 1975 that a Progressive Conservative administration in Newfoundland and Labrador has found itself in hot water over legislation related to Churchill Falls.

In 1980 Brian Peckford’s administration introduced the Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act.  The bill expressly cancelled the 1961 lease.  A subsequent legal challenge by creditors led to a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada that ruled the 1980 statute was illegal. 

One of the influential factors in that case was public comments by politicians that identified the real purpose of the bill as being to undo the 1969 Churchill Falls agreement.

If the 2008 water rights bill effectively expropriated the Churchill Falls complex, it would be the second such move by the Williams administration in 2008.  In December 2008, the Williams administration moved to seize assets of Abitibi, Enel and Fortis including hydro-electric generating facilities. 

Confusion reigns in hydro policy

Revelation of the 2008 water rights ploy is the fourth Lower Churchill-related blockbuster news in a week.

On Friday, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale revealed that the provincial government had been trying unsuccessfully for five years to interest Hydro Quebec in an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill project. 

Dunderdale told Open Line Show host Randy Simms and his audience that the provincial government proposed to “set the Upper Churchill [issue] to one side.”

This move came despite commitments by Premier Danny Williams that there would be no Quebec involvement in the Lower Churchill without redress for the appalling 1969 deal that sees Hydro Quebec buy electricity at better than 1/30th the cost for which it is sold to consumers.    Williams has repeatedly railed against the 1969 deal as an example of a resource give-away by previous provincial governments.

The offer of an ownership stake to Hydro Quebec also flies in the face of Williams’ 2006 commitment to develop the Lower Churchill without any outside help:

"It's an opportunity for us to get back some of what we've lost on the Upper Churchill, and the fact that we're going to do this alone is significant," Williams said in an interview.

The Dunderdale revelation came after Williams accused Hydro Quebec of doing everything possible to block the Lower Churchill project. 

Williams also said last week that  his government would no longer plan to string hydro lines from the Lower Churchill through a UNESCO World Heritage site.

-srbp-

Giving HQ an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill

Via labradore, yet more connected to Kathy Dunderdale’s surprise admission last Friday that the provincial government wants Hydro Quebec to take an ownership stake in the Lower Churchill project.

This time it’s some remarks by Gerry Reid on amendments to the Electrical Power Control Act in 2006.

Reid noted the curious change of position by the government in moving from “go it alone” to “take the lead” on the Lower Churchill.

-srbp-

Signs of impending fun…

1.  An IP address from Hydro Quebec starts prowling around.

2.  Dipper astroturf starts showing up in the comments section of any post that mentions just about anything, but especially anything related to Dippers and elections.  They are all anonymous and all follow a generally similar series of lines about Dipper Ryan Cleary and Grit incumbent Siobhan Coady.

So far  - and this is like some provincial Connies – the comments have been about on the same level as 9/11 truthers. 

When the Grit and Connie astroturfers start in with their counter-strikes, this next federal election could look like a trip to the multiple personality war at the Waterford as Anonymous goes after Anonymous for something Anonymous said.

And people wonder why I think Alice in Wonderland is such an apt source of metaphors for local politics.

-srbp-

So what happened to the Chinese?

The year is 2004. 

The provincial government signs a secret deal with a group of companies – including one owned by the Chinese government – to discuss developing the Lower Churchill.

After questions are raised by local media about the company, the project quietly disappears.

What happened to the Sino Energy deal anyways?

-srbp-

Forward not backward!

We’ve had Rip-Off Ron, the mayoral candidate who likes to lift other people’s campaign slogans.

Now, we have a deputy mayor who makes the perfect match on more than their shared history of using public money to fund the private sector;  on that last one think the Wells-Coombs Memorial Money Pit, then recall Ellsworth thinks it is acceptable to sink taxpayers cash into money losers because local businesses can make huge bucks.

Now we can look forward with Kang …errr… Coombs.

And always twirling, twirling, twirling…

Originality in local politics is evidently at a premium.

-srbp-

Williams miffed Hydro Quebec rejecting ownership stake in Lower Churchill

Far from going it alone on the Lower Churchill or seriously pursuing a transmission route around Quebec,  the Williams administration has been working fervently to get Hydro Quebec on board as a co-owner  of the Labrador project. 

Those efforts have been in vain, according to natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale.

Dunderdale  told VOCM Open Line show host Randy Simms on Friday morning that over the past five years, the Williams administration “got a path beaten to their [Hydro Quebec’s] door” in an attempt to have HQ become what Dunderdale described as an “equity partner” in the Lower Churchill.

Dunderdale described the Lower Churchill “piece” as a “win-win” for Hydro Quebec.  She said that despite efforts by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador there was “no take up [from Hydro Quebec] on the proposal.”

The new version of events offered by Dunderdale is at odds with media reports this week of Premier Danny Williams’  speech to the Canadian Energy Forum meeting in St. John’s last Wednesday.  Williams reportedly accused Hydro Quebec of protecting its own interests and of blocking efforts to develop the Lower Churchill. 

However, Dunderdale’s comments fit with a more careful reading of  Williams’ remarks at the energy forum.

On Wednesday, Williams accused  Hydro Quebec of blocking the Lower Churchill project by not being interested in it at all.  Instead, the Quebec Crown corporation was pursuing other projects – like La Romaine – which Williams said was inferior to the Lower Churchill:  Williams is quoted by the Telegram in a Friday story [not online] as saying “La Romaine is not as good a project as the Lower Churchill.” 

Hydro Quebec is pursuing several projects within Quebec, including alternative sources of energy to hydro, all of which are aimed at boosting Hydro Quebec’s portfolio of capacity by more than 4500 megawatts. 

That was known at the time Williams made the decision in 2006 to “go it alone” on the Lower Churchill.  He also Williams attacked the other projects in 2006.  At that time, he claimed that those projects would get to market before the Lower Churchill and hence would beat out his pet project.  In 2006, Williams vowed to continue in spite of competition.

Friday marked the first time, however, that there was public acknowledgement the provincial government was actually trying to lure Hydro Quebec into an ownership position.

This week also marked the first time Williams linked a possible Hydro Quebec financial stake in the Lower Churchill to the 1969 Churchill falls contract.   Williams told the forum that as a result of Hydro Quebec’s exorbitant profits from Churchill Falls, “the very least I would expect Hydro-Quebec to co-operate with us to the fullest on getting the Lower Churchill through.” 

Previously,  Williams has consistently tied any negotiations with Hydro Quebec over the Lower Churchill with “redress” for the 1969 contract.  That’s inconsistent with offering Hydro Quebec an ownership stake in the new project.

Williams also said that Hydro Quebec had filed procedural applications in an effort to stall a hearing by the Quebec energy regulator - Regie de l’energie – into an objection filed by NALCOR/Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro over a regulatory issue. 

That’s a bizarre way to describe things, though.  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro is one of several interveners in a decision on transmission rates for 2009.  NL Hydro filed its notice seeking intervener status at the last minute.  But since the rate hearings affect more companies than NL Hydro and NL Hydro is one of a dozen interveners, it’s hard to see how a routine regulatory process is part of a plot to frustrate the Lower Churchill.

What’s more, Williams’ claim flies in the face of successful efforts by NL Hydro to wheel power through Quebec.  Hydro started the process in 2006.   In early 2009, Hydro announced successful completion of a deal  with Hydro Quebec’s transmission arm to wheel power through Quebec to markets in the United States.  

Efforts to cut a deal with Hydro-Quebec while claiming something else are only the latest in a series of erratic moves and claims by the provincial government since 2003.

In 2006, Williams rejected out of hand a proposal from Hydro Quebec and Ontario’s Energy Financing Company to finance the Lower Churchill.  The proposal came in response to a called for expressions of interest issued by the Williams administration.  Under the proposal, Ontario and Quebec would buy the power and cover the costs of upgrading transmission facilities within the provinces and across the provincial boundaries.  The proposal also included flexible options on financing the construction of the two generating dams at Gull Island and Muskrat Falls.

Williams tossed that proposal and several others aside in favour of what he characterised at the time as going it alone.

In 2006, Williams said publicly that investors should look to the Lower Churchill instead of projects Quebec because Quebec is politically unstable.  Williams later apologised because people found the comment offensive but he did not retract his comments about Quebec’s political climate.

Williams has also sought financial support from others despite the “go-it-alone” claim. In successive federal elections, Williams has raised the idea of federal loan guarantees with federal party leaders.  He has also tied federal financial support for the Lower Churchill as some apparent form of compensation for having to run transmission lines around Gros Morne national park.

The erratic public positions don’t stop there. 

In 2008, natural resources minister Kathy Dunderdale indicated the provincial government was considering a law suit against the federal government over the 1969 contract.  Later in the day, the provincial government backtracked.

In early 2009, an official with NL Hydro hinted that the provincial government was considering financing options other than the “go-it-alone” version.  Little did the people of Newfoundland and Labrador know what the other options were.

-srbp-

Clued out

Lorraine Michael needs to read more or get better research staff.

"I'm glad that the premier has finally shown that he believes that being part of a Canada-wide energy plan is something that he believes in. I had not heard this before."

Try 2007, for example.

Or the same story, as rendered by the Ceeb:

One topic that dominated Thursday morning's sessions was the idea to build a national energy grid that would make sure all provinces benefit fully from Canada's resources. 

"We need to find a way to get those [resources] to the Canadian people," Williams said. "There is a solution here."

or this:

Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams, whose government is keen to relaunch the mothballed Lower Churchill Falls hydro mega-project to sell power to energy-hungry Ontario, said he would be open to having the federal government fund all or part of a new national electrical grid.

Heck, you can even find reference to hooking onto the grid in the 2003 Tory campaign book if you bother to go look.

All that extra cash the government caucus threw to Lorraine last winter evidently hasn’t helped to clue her in.  A 30 second google search and a raft of quotes turned up all showing only that Michael is out to lunch on this energy issue.

h/t to a keen reader, DL.

-srbp-

You’re welcome

“The argument was made, quite rightly, by people that you don’t want to create an eyesore in…one of our best tourism attractions in the province.”

Premier Danny Williams, Energy Council of Canada conference, St. John’s September 2009

-srbp-

Two wrongs… and you get a news story

Both VOCM and the Telegram incorrectly reported the latest poll results from government sponsored polls on Thursday.

VOCM reported that the “latest numbers from Corporate Research Associates show Danny Williams and the PC's gaining strength, despite being almost halfway through their second term.”

The Telly reported that the “province’s decided voters are showing more support for the Progressive Conservative government…”.  The story is on page three of the Thursday edition but isn’t available online.

As a famous politician likes to say,  nothing could be further from the truth.

Both reported the numbers given in response to a question on which political party respondents would pick if an election were held tomorrow. 

The problem comes from the fact that the provincial government’s pollster – Corporate Research Associates – gives its results as a percentage of decided voters, not as a percentage of all people whose answers are included in the poll data.  The change in the number of undecideds can affect the relative share of decideds any one party has.

If we build it…

From nottawa, one take on the curious case of a government building a new health centre while at the same time shifting health services out of the community.

-srbp-

Timing

According to Premier Danny Williams, the Tory backbencher representing Lewisporte was told “some time ago” that health services in the town would be changed.

According to Here and Now - CBC television’s supper hour news show - the people responsible for delivering the health service (Central regional health authority)  found out about the changes the morning they were announced publicly.

And they had no hand in deciding how to implement the changes.

Interesting.

-srbp-

Late summer re-run

Pushing the Lower Churchill, the 2006 version.

Pushing the Lower Churchill, the 2009 version.

After all, it worked so well the last time to get people to fund the project.

-srbp-

Freedom from Information: Conference Prep Kit

Information and privacy commissioners from across Canada can count on support from Bond Papers as they gather in St. John’s  next week for their annual conference. 

To help them get ready for the meeting, they can use the conveniently located conference prep kit located at the top of the right hand nav bar. 

It contains a a set of convenient links to Bond Papers posts describing the sorry state of  affairs in Newfoundland and Labrador when it comes to openness and accountability.

-srbp-

A mine of information for an enemy

What Maxime Bernier left laying about, courtesy of Le Devoir.

Les documents oubliés par Maxime Bernier chez Julie Couillard en avril 2008, et obtenus en primeur par Le Devoir, sont une véritable mine d'information dont la divulgation risquerait de porter préjudice à la défense et à la politique étrangère du Canada et de ses alliés, et de fournir des renseignements cruciaux à leurs ennemis. De l'élargissement de l'OTAN aux pays des Balkans à la contribution de celui-ci dans la lutte contre le terrorisme, des prisonniers talibans en Afghanistan à la défense antimissile, du contrôle des armements au conflit israélo-palestinien, de la situation en l'Ukraine à la présence d'al-Qaïda au Pakistan en passant par la position du Canada en ce qui concerne le dalaï-lama et le nucléaire iranien, tous les grands sujets de la politique canadienne à l'étranger y sont abordés de manière détaillée.

-srbp-

Convenient Craftiness?

Tory backbencher Wade Verge is pissed because he wasn’t told health services in his district were on the chopping block.

The Premier is dismissing Verge’s claim with a snort and a sneer.

But Premier Danny Williams said Verge needs to check his facts since he was briefed "some time ago" by the premier's chief of staff.

"I think now his explanation to us this morning is that he didn't understand that that's what it meant. Pfff. Anyway, for what it's worth, he's entitled to his opinion. … Obviously he has to act on the behalf on what he thinks are the best interests of his district," he said.

The chief of staff would be Brian Crawley.

So, that means the Premier is trusting the recollections of a guy who told Madam Justice Cameron that he was beset by a form of C.R.A.F.T  disease:  he can’t recall a friggin’ thing.

Interesting.

-srbp-

Meanwhile, down the other rabbit hole…

The Dippers  - who only a few days ago were sending around publicly-funded propaganda about the number of times Liberals have backed Stephen Harper over the past year – are about to announce their plans to back Stephen Harper.

What could possibly happen next?

Some candidate leaving a job to spend more time with his kids and then announcing he wants to be a member of parliament?

Oh.

That already happened.

Okaaaaaaaaaaaay.

Like things are just going to get weirder and dangerouser.

-srbp-

It’s still fire truck month

With Labour Day falling late this year, the government’s official pollster is likely still in the field.

That likely explains the flurry of news today, including a new fire truck.

We already told you about this special time of year back in August.

-srbp-

A world of his own

“If I had a world of my own,” said Alice, “everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary-wise; what it is it wouldn't be, and what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”

And in such a world, there is to be no more talk of running steel erections through a UNESCO World Heritage site.

He has decided to go around the park.  According to the voice of the cabinet minister, He said He was only kidding on that one.

Quite the yuck it was too.

Not once, but twice and the second time with sprinkles: better to wreck the park than risk Granny’s heart surgery or some such.

There are only two possible real reasons for this change of direction.

Either the federal government told the province officially to get stuffed or the Premier has a poll that shows the public are adamantly and persistently opposed to his plan to run power lines through Gros Morne to bring Labrador power to the townies.

The last time the Premier shifted directions this abruptly and unexpectedly – the flag thing – he had a poll that showed the strategy was far less brilliant than thought by the ones who thunk it up in the first place. 

In this case, the feds might have also told him to forget any plans to try and run the lines through the park, easement or no easement.  You can see a clue to that possibility in the number of times the Premier made reference to needing federal cash for what was supposed to be a go-it-alone option. He keeps talking about federal money like you’d expect him to say if they’d turned him down flat.  They said no, so now they have to compensate me for the inconvenience;  that sort of thing.

But instead he is claiming credit for making the momentous and correct decision and trying to pretend he didn’t make the incorrect one the first time.

And then persistently, stubbornly, unreasonably stick to it for half a year.

The federal government is under no obligation to pay a nickel for running the power to the townies.  That’s all the line on the island will do, you see. There’s nothing in it about running run power to the Yanks.  no matter how many times Danny Williams has tried to claim federal political commitments, there’s not a shred of evidence any ever existed.

Whoever decided, at least the right decision was made in the end.  It’s just that in this world where nothing is as it appears, the people who fell down the rabbit hole in 2003 will likely never know.

-srbp-

Confusion reigns in election story

So which is it?

Are election campaigns too expensive or is “at large” candidate Sheilagh O’Leary having trouble raising money because none of her prospective donors can get a tax receipt?

A cbc.ca/nl story seems to be all confuddled.

The headline is about the cost of running campaigns. m That’s also the premise on which they spoke to mayoral wannabe Ron Ellsworth.  Good call, too ‘cause Ellsworth evidently believes campaigns are about how much money you can throw into things.

But the quote from O’Leary on which the whole piece hangs isn’t about that at all.

Sheilagh O'Leary, who is running for councillor at large, said candidates should get tax deductions for some of their election expenses, a change she wants to see in time for the next municipal election.

"I would certainly like to see that changed because certainly in provincial and federal elections you get a tax deductible receipt, and that is very enticing for people, no kidding, when it comes to tax time," she said. "I think there are a lot of people who are daunted about the financial cost."

Maybe the CBC reporter misunderstood what O’Leary was talking about.

Maybe O’Leary misunderstood.

But there’s no doubt that the tax break O’Leary is looking for isn’t the one aimed at candidates.

So what’s the real story here?

Someone at CBC needs to go back and find it because the whole point is lost in there somewhere.

Meanwhile, unless she is another one of those candidates who finances their own campaign, O’Leary looks confused.  meanwhile, the story prompted a range of comments from people interested in banning campaign signs to a couple of Ron and Sheighlagh supporters who evidently have no idea what is on the go and don’t care.

Talking about anything but the issue at hand or what city council actually does.

Gee, how appropriate for a townie municipal election.

-srbp-

Campaign College: Sign Design 101

There is a difference between political communications and advertising.

Here’s a simple, graphic example. 

One of the signs in these pictures was designed from the start to convey essential information simply, succinctly and at long distances.

It uses bright colours and a font that is easy to read, even at a distance.

It was not designed by an ad agency.

A by-product of the design is that it is also visible – and legible – when travelling at the speeds one normally encounters in city driving.

The other two weren’t.

Obviously.

The pictures were taken at the intersection of Westerland Road and the parkway, from the corner opposite the signs and without any zoom.

The sign legible in this shot was also plainly legible to the unaided eye at twice and three times this distance.

-srbp-

Curiouser and curiouser!

Even in the Land Through the Looking Glass that is Newfoundland and Labrador these days, a news release about an emergency session of the House of Assembly to deal with an amendment to  a single piece of legislation is very odd, indeed.

As the official version puts it:

In the course of negotiating a water management agreement for the Churchill River, CF(L)Co advised Nalcor that it felt aspects of the Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act infringed upon its water rights lease for the Churchill Falls development. This was not the intent of the act, and government has agreed to amend it so as to avoid any ambiguity.

First of all, one must realise, of course, that NALCOR is the parent of Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation or CFLCo.  It holds 65% of the shares, in fact, and the two companies are not completely separate entities.  They are rather closely and intimately connected, in fact.

Second of all, one must also note that the section of the Electrical Power Control Act 1994 requiring a water management agreement came into effect this past January. 

In 2007, the current administration introduced this amendment in the legislature requiring two companies trying to generate hydro from the same river to come to some agreement on water sharing have one imposed by the public utilities board.   For whatever reason the current administration did not give it force of law until early 2009.

Third of all, the original lease that CF(L)Co holds has been around since 1961.  its provisions are well known to a host people inside and outside the provincial government.   in fact, given the history of the lease, it’s probably one of the most well studied and well-understood pieces of legal documentation existing anywhere in Canada.

And that’s the really odd thing.

Well, aside from the oddity of the company effectively negotiating with Itself, and then notifying Itself in the course of negotiations that Itself had a problem with something Itself had been party to previously because that infringed on something else Itself had also been party to much earlier.

You see, there is nothing that would have been noticed during the negotiation of a water management agreement for the Churchill River since January 2009  involving NALCOR, Energy Corporation, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro or CF(L)Co or whatever name the Crown version of Sybil is using at the moment that wasn’t painfully obvious to NALCOR,  Energy Corporation Hydro or CF(L)Co or Sybil, as she then was, when the provincial government introduced the changes to the EPCA, 1994 in 2007 and then introduced the Energy Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador Water Rights Act in early 2008.

What seems to be up for discussion here is something  your humble e-scribbler pointed out back in February. 

If that weren’t enough, changes to the Electrical Power Control Act – passed in 2007 but only quietly implemented after the expropriation in December 2008 – ensures that NALCO can enforce its control over future developments through the Public Utilities Board.

If one takes the implication from a set of Hydro Quebec questions about the Lower Churchill environmental assessment, the proposed water management regime appears to require that Churchill Falls be run in such a way as to maximize the generation at the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls dams under all contingencies. 

This might adversely affect CF(L)Co and some of its contractual arrangements to supply power.  It would also seem to go against several sections of the original lease.

If the government news release is clear – and that is by no means obvious – then the emergency session of the legislature is likely to be about passing an amendment that removes the last clause of the water rights act.  That’s the one that requires a water management agreement be reached or that one be imposed by the public utilities board.

What’s so interesting – if that’s the case – is that this is coming in an emergency session and not simply held for the fall sitting.  An amendment to the legislation could have been made later on with the requirement to produce the amendment being made a condition of any water management agreement.

There must be some sort of threat at work here, something much more significant than the prospect of an agreement between  “Nalcor Energy or its subsidiary and CF(L)Co”.  Incidentally, CF(L)Co is a subsidiary of NALCOR. 

Rather, there might not be much hope of a deal at all in the near term.  Instead,  CF(L)Co  - perhaps at the insistence of one of its shareholders – is protecting its interests and ensuring that the legal problems inherent in the EPCA amendment and the water rights act be eliminated now, without question or condition.

And if it was anything else, like say a repeat of the old water rights reversion act, then the thing would have been trumpeted in news conference held by the Premier.  Something says he just wouldn’t be able to resist the temptation to grandstand against any slight. 

Nope.  This is something government is trying to downplay, somewhat.

But rest assured:  emergency sessions like this one don’t happen every day and they sure as heck don’t come for a routine amendment, even if it is one intended merely to avoid “ambiguity”.

There’s something big behind this.

And it may not be pretty for the Lower Churchill project.

-srbp-

Municipal election reality reminder

There are three weeks left in the municipal election in St. John’s.

Ballot kits go out in the mail on Friday, September 11 and they will start arriving in mailboxes on September 14.

The first ballots will start arriving back at City hall on September 15 and over the next week and a bit roughly 50% of the ballots that will come in will either be safely at Tammany on Gower or will be on the way via Canada Post.

About half the eligible voters in St. John’s will not bother to vote. 

Incumbents are more likely to get re-elected in any election but in St. John’s with the mail-in ballot system, the bonus that comes from incumbency is exaggerated even more than usual.

In other words, unless you have the misfortune of being an incumbent with some issues associated with your term on council – as in one ward in 2005 -  odds are heavily in your favour that you’ll go back to Tammany on Gower.  

Familiarity counts for a lot in St. John’s politics and in this election the dominant view seems to be that as long as you haven’t shagged anyone over, there’s no reason to change.  Bland is good, for the most part.  It’s a conservative town, at least on the outside, and sameness counts for much. What that means is that with the exception of a couple of spots, the incumbents are going back.

Over the next couple of days, your humble e-scribbler will take a look at the four spots where there is anything like a race:  Ward Three, At Large, Deputy Mayor and Mayor.

-srbp-

Big poll goose but less money for forestry than claimed

Throughout 2008 and 2009, the provincial government claimed it created a forest sector diversification program in 2008 worth $14 million, but there’s no sign in publicly available documents that the money was actually budgeted and spent until 2009.

And the amounts mentioned in different government documents, including the 2009 budget, show there was less money involved than the $14 million referred to constantly.

A news release issued in April 2008 referred to a total of $14 million in diversification funds.  That included $11 million  “to establish a diversification program that will provide for infrastructure required by industry to produce new forest products and gain access to new markets.” Another $500,000 was supposed to go to promoting the wood pellet industry.

A November 2008 news release on the wood pellet promotion also refers to $14 million and a name;  Forest Industry Diversification Program

A description on the federal government’s website claims a $14 million program was created in 2008.

But Budget 2008 Highlights don’t mention the diversification project at all.  instead there’s a reference to 

“Allocating $10 million in provincial funding to add to the $4 million in federal funding under the Community Development Trust for forest industry initiatives.”

And there’s  no such program or amount anywhere in the 2008 budget for the department responsible for the forest industry that covers the federal and provincial cash totalling $14 million or anything close to it.

That didn’t become become plain until early 2009 and the new provincial budget.

The 2009 Estimates (right)show that the government didn’t spend a nickel on the program before the end of March 2009. The “revised” column is blank.

Instead, the provincial government carried over the federal cash received but not spent in 2008 and added to it the rest of the original federal contribution for a total of $4.0 million in cash from Ottawa.

What’s more, the provincial government didn’t add either $10 million or $11 million of its own money in 2009 as it had suggested in previous news releases.   Nor did it add a second year’s provincial contribution to the first to make a program worth upwards of $25 million.

Instead, the provincial government included the extra federal cash and reduced the provincial cash to a produce a program in 2009 that had less money than earlier news releases claimed.

The tomfoolery didn’t stop there.

The 2009 budget highlight document uses a while new set of numbers that don’t match any of the others and which certainly don’t match the figures included in the 2009 budget.

Here’s what it said:

Further investment of $6 million in the Forestry Industry Diversification Fund to assist the industry in identifying new products and markets. This is in addition to the $8.5 million carried forward from 2008.

There was no new investment, of course, as the budget documents clearly show.

As it is, two sawmills gobbled up 83% of the interest-free money in the form of  loans that don’t have to be repaid for 15 years and as grants that never have to be repaid.  One received a total of $10 million while a second scarfed down $2.25 million in free government cash.  The same cash was announced several times over the course of a week during August polling season 2009.

The other money appears to have gone the wood pellet program and to hiring a marketing consultant for a project that supposedly cost – you guessed it - $14 million. 

-srbp-

The story that won’t go away, banner version

Some smart bunny or bunnies is buying advertising in the Grand Falls-Windsor weekly to remind locals how much money is being made from hydro assets the provincial government seized last December.

Run bi-weekly in the local Grand Falls-Windsor Advertiser under a banner that reads "Expropriation by the Numbers," the sparsely worded ads suggest the province has so far earned $28 million from the hydro facilities.

The ads say that's $1,100 for every citizen in the Exploits Valley, and question why more of that money isn't being spent in the region.

There’s a move afoot in central Newfoundland to get the money from the hydro assets to offset the loss of the Abitibi paper mill.

Thus far, the requests have fallen on deaf ears.

But the expropriation story just won’t stop bleeding all over the political landscape.  Not only are the crowd in central looking for cash but there’s a good chance the provincial government will wind up paying big time for the expropriation itself. 

This central story has got to be causing some hard political damage to the careers of people like Susan Sullivan, one of the local members of the provincial legislature.  Even a quickie elevation to cabinet hasn’t silenced the cries for government cash.

Then again, it’s not like the provincial government doesn’t have bags and bags of cash it doesn’t want to talk about, either. 

Odd then that they are resisting any kind of substantive move in central Newfoundland to deal with the ongoing political damage done by the hasty and evidently ill considered seizure back in December. The way this whole mess is unfolding, you’d almost think the whole expropriation was done at the spur of the moment without even a hint of a plan, let alone a second thought for any of the consequences.

N’ah.  Couldn’t be.

-srbp-

Chiep basturds

If Quentin Tarantino wanted to shoot an homage to the political sign oeuvres of local municipal candidates, that’s what he’d call it.

So like how many city council incumbents are reusing campaign signs from at least one election ago?

Pretty well all of them.

Got pictures?

Send ‘em in and your humble e-scribbler will post ‘em.  bondpapers at hotmail dot com.

-srbp-

Much at 25

Those were the days, back when JD was JD and not a newscaster named John.

Some are still out there. Others have gone on to different things or bigger things.

MuchMusic turns 25 today.

-srbp-

Freedom from Information: Whose briefing book is it anyway?

Health minister Paul Oram claimed he didn’t have any briefing notes when he took over the department.

Aural is moral, as the saying went.

Some local media outlets, like the Telegram, went looking for briefing notes and were told by officials they didn’t exist. 

Now, of course it’s not unusual for government officials to be less than truthful in answering media requests for documents.  Back then, the officials said one thing (no documents) but the politician involved – namely no less a personage than the Premier Hisself – said something different (sure we got ‘em).

But in this case, it is way freakin’ spooky that Oram told the Gander Beacon he had a couple of feet of files -  including briefing notes -  to go through  after the officials and Oram had said there was nada in the space marked briefing notes. 

The story now gets off into a whole new realm of bizarre:   Oram is now claiming there were briefing notes but that they weren’t prepared or him. 

And in Oram’s whack-o world, he has time to read through two feet of material prepared “for someone else” but if he had briefing notes with his name on him, he’d never have time to do anything but read briefing notes.

Huh?

Exactly the reaction one would expect for such an obvious bullshit claim:

There are a bunch of files, and there are a bunch of different issues that sit on my desk every single day. They may not be in the form of a briefing note, but everything is filed and documented - there' a paper trail for everything."

Briefing notes are sent through his department on a constant basis, but Minister Oram said they are not prepared for him.

"I didn't ask for somebody to give me a load of briefing notes so I would start going through them," he said. "If I had to do that, that's all I'd do - read. I just don't have the time to go read every single formal briefing note that there is. But I do have the time to sit and have someone explain to me what we have on right now, and then I go through the files we have there."

All of this is in aid of defending efforts by the Oral Majority – i.e. the cabinet – that appear to be designed to circumvent laws in the province aimed at making government information available to the public.  Oram’s been at this a while:  recall that he earlier denied that not putting things in writing was not a way of not putting things in writing.

And again, your heads are clearly twisting trying to make sense of the ministerial confusion over such a simple thing as whether or not there are briefing notes Oram is reading in order to get up to speed on his new responsibilities.

It’s not like we asked him to recount recent history or anything.

-srbp-

Carry over

One of the great budgetary practices of the current administration is something called carry over.

Projects are budgeted and announced in one year and then they don’t get started, let alone finished.

Government gets multiple good news hits out the practice. 

First, they get the warm fuzzy media coverage from announcing the spending in the first place.  Sometimes they keep announcing the spending even though it hasn’t happened.  Second, if by some chance work does start, they can announce that and keep it up until the thing is finished.  it’s not unusual to see things started four years continue to appear  in releases as if it was part of current spending.

Like say a hospital in Corner Brook that was tossed into the “stimulus” counter-measure even though it was begun and should have been finished long before anyone even thought of a recession.

Now when the project doesn’t happen, there is never an announcement of the bad news.  Not likely.  The money budgeted but not spent becomes “surplus” and is part of the announcement of the record “surplus” in the spring.

Then the project is carried over into the new budget and re-announced.

If the delay has caused increased costs, this is not something to be chagrined about.  Not on your life.  Any politician worth his or her salt will trumpet the fact the same project will now cost even more because of the delay.  If any one of us mere mortals missed the chance for a good deal and had to pay 30% more for the same thing, we’d be kicking ourselves for being so stunned.  When politicians drop the ball; and it costs you 30% more for the same thing, that is a great investment in the local community.

And if it jumps 71%, as in the St. Alban’s aquaculture centre?  Well, that is just “stimulus”.

Carry over is very big in the current provincial government administration.  They carry over lots of things. 

Like in Labrador West, where a new hospital was promised just in time for a by-election in late 2006/early 2007 and the thing is still in the planning stages the better part of three years later.

Or a new campus for the College of the North Atlantic.  Tender went out on May 4 with a closing date of June 17.  (Well, the initial news release in early May said the thing was going to tender.  A “stimulus” announcement in June said the thing would be tendered in June.)

The tender was awarded three weeks ago – i.e. about a month or more after the tender closed – and as we slide easily into Labour Day, Jim Baker, the local MHA has no idea when the thing will get started. But Baker can assure residents of the area that the project costs have climbed from $18 million to $22 million and that no steel framework will be done this year.

None.

But they might get the site prepared and concrete poured.

Maybe.

So the campus project will be carried over until next year.

Just like the hospital.

or the aquaculture centre.

When was they supposed to be finished again?

-srbp-

Unaccelerated

Remember that news release claiming that work on the Trans-Labrador Highway was being “accelerated” when it actually wasn’t.

Well, it wasn’t and now there is the excuse to go with it, courtesy of Jim Baker the Tory MHA for Labrador West:

"Given the time it got started, the preparation work that needed to be done and the time it took to get mobilized, I'm pleasantly surprised by how much has been done," he stated. "Next year obviously, when they get started, everything will be ready to move. All the crushing will be done, so all they'll have to do is lay out the blacktop."

And that blacktop will be laid next year as originally planned back in June when they let the first tender go.  Had they waited on the second tender until next year, the work would have been done…

wait for it…

next year.

As planned.

-srbp-